Well, the old coot changed his mind. He wants revenge on the NBA and is still trying to play the bogus 1st amendment angle as if the NBA has violated his rights. Lol. So he suing just to get the fine and lifetime ban removed? Is that what is happening?

This guy is gonna refuse a $2 billion dollar deal to sue for $1 billion dollars to negate a $2.5 million dollar fine.

That this is actually happening is even more stupid then his idiotic mistress.

Well, the old coot changed his mind. He wants revenge on the NBA and is still trying to play the bogus 1st amendment angle as if the NBA has violated his rights. Lol. So he suing just to get the fine and lifetime ban removed? Is that what is happening?

This guy is gonna refuse a $2 billion dollar deal to sue for $1 billion dollars to negate a $2.5 million dollar fine.

That this is actually happening is even more stupid then his idiotic mistress.

His wife can't sign away his rights like I told you.

Bogus 1st amendment? It isn't bogus. You're defending peoples rights getting trampled just because you don't like what they said? The PC brainwashing has already won then.

What rights have the NBA violated? They didn't tape him. They didn't take the team from him. He's gonna make a profit from the sale that's above market value. The only thing he's suing for is a bruised ego.

Your argument comes down to: The NBA violated Sterling's rights because his mistress taped him without his consent?!? Not in any way shape or form does that make any sense.

LOS ANGELES — Donald Sterling's lawyers, days before the scheduled beginning of a trial in probate court that might clear the way for the sale of the Los Angeles Clippers to billionaire former Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer, are seeking to move the case to federal court.

"This (Thursday) afternoon, we filed a Notice of Removal to Federal Court on behalf of Donald T. Sterling in the Probate Matter," said Sterling's lawyer, Bobby Samini, in a statement. "As we have stated repeatedly and from the onset of this matter, it is our contention that Donald's privacy rights have been trampled by the release of his medical records.

"In our request for removal to federal court, we have reasserted that Donald's rights under HIPAA and other federal privacy laws have been violated. While Shelly Sterling and her team will claim that this is merely a tactic, we feel strongly that this important issue should be addressed by the federal court at this time. While it has become popular to attack Donald Sterling for his regrettable comments, his right to privacy and to the protection of his medical records should not be acceptable collateral damage."

Donald's lawyers claim in a brief filed in court Thursday that Shelly and her lawyers conspired to find Donald incapacitated for the sole purpose of selling the Clippers to Ballmer.

They claim that Shelly's removal of Donald as a co-trustee in the Sterling Family Trust was through fraud and "in breach of her fiduciary duties to Donald as a co-trustee, as a co-settlor and as her husband."

"If Shelly could not sell the team with Donald's consent and free will, Shelly, with the help of her attorneys, would unilaterally deprive Donald of his voice," Donald's lawyers state in court papers. "This was the first of Shelly's legal maneuvers to take advantage of her husband. As an insurance policy, she knew that if she could not obtain her husband's written consent to sell the Clippers, she could snidely usurp control from him, without him even knowing."

Streisand said in an e-mail to USA TODAY Sports that the motion will delay the trial, which is scheduled to begin at 8:30 a.m. PT Monday.

"We will all be there," Streisand said. "We will have to wait for the federal court to act. We hope the federal court will act swiftly but whether that is hours or days is anyone's guess. It is a pathetic ploy because Donald Sterling and his lawyers know they have no case."

Donald's lawyers claim that Meril Platzer, in her May 19 examination of Donald at his Beverly Hills home, and James E. Spar, in his May 22 examination of Donald, never informed Donald of the nature of their meetings.

They also claim that Donald never waived any rights protecting disclosure of confidential medical information.

"Donald Sterling's 11th-hour attempt to move the probate trial into the federal courts is a desperate act by a desperate man," O'Donnell said. "His lawyers have failed three times ... to delay the trial in Los Angeles County probate court, where this matter rightfully belongs. This latest bad-faith maneuver on the eve of his reckoning is a cowardly ploy to do just one thing: Kill a record-setting $2 billion sale of the Clippers.

"Moreover, Donald's claim of a HIPPA violation is preposterous. As a lawyer, Donald knows that he expressly authorized public release of his medical records under the terms of the trust. For a man who vows to fight to preserve his dignity, Donald is showing very little of it with such a blatant underhanded tactic. We are confident that the federal court will promptly remand the case back to Judge Michael Levanas and that Donald will be forced to face the music."

The ousted ex-owner can appeal continue to sue the NBA and/or his wife if he chooses, but with the sale now complete, all he can hope to win is money. Plus, since Shelly Sterling previously agreed that the Sterling Family Trust would indemnify the NBA against lawsuits by her husband, he'd essentially just be suing himself.

Donald Sterling is expected to appeal Levanas' new order and ask an appellate court to vacate the ruling that confirms Shelly Sterling's authority. Such an appeal is considered to have virtually zero chance of succeeding. From the perspectives of every party involved in this ongoing saga save for Donald himself, this is now considered a done deal.

No first amendment rights were violated, a forced sale was not illegal and he can't win any money from the NBA. Now we can stop with the charade that this, "Sets a dangerous precedent..." Anyone defending Sterling now is just mad cause his racist comments got him kicked out of the league.

This won't change anything in the NBA structure at all. For all we know, Ballmer is a secret skinhead, but as long as he keeps his mouth shut and doesn't tape himself, everything is good and everyone can go back to making money.

The ousted ex-owner can appeal continue to sue the NBA and/or his wife if he chooses, but with the sale now complete, all he can hope to win is money. Plus, since Shelly Sterling previously agreed that the Sterling Family Trust would indemnify the NBA against lawsuits by her husband, he'd essentially just be suing himself.

Donald Sterling is expected to appeal Levanas' new order and ask an appellate court to vacate the ruling that confirms Shelly Sterling's authority. Such an appeal is considered to have virtually zero chance of succeeding. From the perspectives of every party involved in this ongoing saga save for Donald himself, this is now considered a done deal.

Either way this sets an ugly precedent for property rights it's a shame you don't see it.

I don't know why you are cheerleading for something getting taken away from someone who earned it and bought it. His wife hustled him by using her own doctors to declare him incapable of making decisions and unfortunately that part was upheld. Sterling may be old but he definitely has command of his mental faculties.

You don't see a problem with doctors saying Sterling is incapable of making decisions giving his wife authority to sell yet the NBA forcing him out for comments he made? Why isn't the 'dementia' excuse being used for his comments as well as the sale?

This is a pile of BS and I disagree with the judge completely. Public perception doomed him even if he is in the right regarding maintaining his property.

Either way this sets an ugly precedent for property rights it's a shame you don't see it.

I don't know why you are cheerleading for something getting taken away from someone who earned it and bought it. His wife hustled him by using her own doctors to declare him incapable of making decisions and unfortunately that part was upheld. Sterling may be old but he definitely has command of his mental faculties.

You don't see a problem with doctors saying Sterling is incapable of making decisions giving his wife authority to sell yet the NBA forcing him out for comments he made? Why isn't the 'dementia' excuse being used for his comments as well as the sale?

This is a pile of BS and I disagree with the judge completely. Public perception doomed him even if he is in the right regarding maintaining his property.

Public perception is what set things in motion but all these things that happened to Sterling have happened to other people that's why there's no precedent in this.
I told you he would be forced to sell after the NBA owners decided they wanted him out. All of his claims have been denied by the court, (which is the only opinion that matters) and Sterling can't sue the NBA either. I find it funny that people think Sterling's been wronged in this. He got fair value for his team so there's no monetary loss for him at all. The only thing he lost was his pride.

but all these things that happened to Sterling have happened to other people that's why there's no precedent in this.

What are you talking about? What has happened to other people like this? Who has gotten things taken away over illegally recorded private conversations?

Originally Posted by hnic357

I told you he would be forced to sell after the NBA owners decided they wanted him out.

He wasn't forced to sell. The judge said his WIFE HAD THE AUTHORITY TO SELL. They couldn't force him to do anything. His wife had shady doctors declare him mentally unfit, that's it. The NBA didn't make him do anything.

Originally Posted by hnic357

All of his claims have been denied by the court, (which is the only opinion that matters) and Sterling can't sue the NBA either.

Of course he can sue the NBA. He is suing the NBA.

Originally Posted by hnic357

I find it funny that people think Sterling's been wronged in this. He got fair value for his team so there's no monetary loss for him at all. The only thing he lost was his pride.

It doesn't matter if he gets fair value, more, or less. What matters is the right to free speech and the right to property. You just don't get it.

What are you talking about? What has happened to other people like this? Who has gotten things taken away over illegally recorded private conversations?

first of all, nothing is being taken away. He's being forced to sell his franchise rights. Secondly, the illegal recording is irrelevant. Sterling did not mention the recording in his suit to stop the sale. He could have made the argument that the league was forcing him to sell because of the recording. He didn't because he knew it wouldn't make a difference.

Originally Posted by Sticky

He wasn't forced to sell. The judge said his WIFE HAD THE AUTHORITY TO SELL. They couldn't force him to do anything. His wife had shady doctors declare him mentally unfit, that's it. The NBA didn't make him do anything.

Oh please. His wife was selling because of the commissioners threat to revoke his franchise liscense. She also testified in court that sterling directed her to make the sale but apparently changed his mind a few days later. I told you he had no chance to get the sale stopped and I was right.

Originally Posted by Sticky

Of course he can sue the NBA. He is suing the NBA.

but he can't win anything since the NBA is indemnified against any lawsuit from Sterling. Even if he does win some kind of ruling that says the NBA wronged him, I guarantee you your claim of, "illegal recording is a violation of 1st amendment rights..." will not hold up in court. Once information becomes public, it doesn't matter how it got there. Don't believe me, believe Donald Sterling.

Originally Posted by Sticky

It doesn't matter if he gets fair value, more, or less. What matters is the right to free speech and the right to property. You just don't get it.

YOU don't get it. There's no violation of free speech. The govt didn't force him to sell. The govt isn't punishing him in anyway shape or form. Sterling can hold a press conference tomorrow and say he hates black people. There will be no govt sanction against him. His right to property has not been violated. He bought a franchise and has 29 other partners that can force you out if you violate their franchise agreement. Now you may say that his recorded comments weren't enough to warrant the sanctions against him, but Sterling took it seriously enough that he initiated the sale of his team before they voted to remove him. So, if there was a real threat to his right to own property don't you think Sterling, who's a lawyer and owns lots of property, would make that argument first? He didn't because it's not relevant. Don't believe me, believe Sterling.